Advertisement

Journal of Neuro-Oncology

, Volume 112, Issue 2, pp 173–178 | Cite as

Interlaboratory comparison of IDH mutation detection

  • Martin J. van den Bent
  • C. Hartmann
  • Matthias Preusser
  • Thomas Ströbel
  • Hendrikus J. Dubbink
  • Johan M. Kros
  • Andreas von Deimling
  • Blandine Boisselier
  • Marc Sanson
  • Kevin C. Halling
  • Kristin L. Diefes
  • Kenneth Aldape
  • Caterina Giannini
Laboratory Investigation

Abstract

Isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH) mutational testing is becoming increasingly important. For this, robust and reliable assays are needed. We tested the variation of results between six laboratories of testing for IDH mutations. Each laboratory received five unstained slides from 31 formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) glioma samples, and followed its own standard IDH diagnostic routine. All laboratories used immunohistochemistry (IHC) with an antibody against the most frequent IDH1 mutation (R132H) as a first step. Three laboratories then sequenced only IHC negative cases while the others sequenced all cases. Based on the overall analysis, 13 samples from 11 tumors had an R132H mutation and one tumor showed an R132G mutation. Results of IHC for IDH1 R132H mutations in all six laboratories were completely in agreement, and identified all R132H mutations. Upon sequencing the results of two laboratories deviated from those of the others. After a review of the entire diagnostic process, on repeat (blinded) testing one laboratory was completely in agreement with the overall result. A change in technique did only partially improve the results in the other laboratory. IHC for the IDH1 R132H mutation is very reliable and consistent across laboratories. IDH sequencing procedures yielded inconsistent results in 2 out of 6 laboratories. Quality assurance is pivotal before IDH testing is made part of clinical management of patients.

Keywords

IDH1 Immunohistochemistry Sequencing Interlaboratory comparison 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The technical assistence of Marcel M. van der Weiden, Edward Post (ErasmusMC), Brooke E Mc Cann, Jesse S Voss (Mayo Clinics), Dr. Johannes A. Hainfellner (Institute of Neurology, Medical University of Vienna) is gratefully acknowledged. Dr Caterina Giannini was in part supported by Grant Number P50CA108961 from the National Cancer Institute. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Cancer Institute or the National Institutes of Health.

Disclosure

Under a licensing agreement between DIANOVA GmbH, Hamburg, Germany, and the German Cancer Research Center, Andreas von Deimling and Christian Hartmann are entitled to a share of royalties received by the German Cancer Research Center on the sales of H09 antibody. The terms of this arrangement are being managed by the German Cancer Research Center in accordance with its conflict of interest policies.

References

  1. 1.
    Balss J, Meyer J, Mueller W et al (2008) Analysis of the IDH1 codon 132 mutation in brain tumors. Acta Neuropathol 116:597–602PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Watanabe T, Nobusawa S, Kleihues P et al (2009) IDH1 mutations are early events in the development of astrocytomas and oligodendrogliomas. Am J Pathol 174:1149–1153PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Dang L, White DW, Gross S et al (2009) Cancer-associated IDH1 mutations produce 2-hydroxyglutarate. Nature 462:739–744PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Parsons DW, Jones S, Zhang X et al (2008) An integrated genomic analysis of human glioblastoma multiforme. Science 321:1807–1812PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Turcan S, Rohle D, Goenka A et al (2012) IDH1 mutation is sufficient to establish the glioma hypermethylator phenotype. Nature 483:479–483PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    van den Bent MJ, Dubbink HJ, Marie Y et al (2010) IDH1 and IDH2 mutations are prognostic but not predictive for outcome in anaplastic oligodendroglial tumors: a report of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Brain Tumor Group. Clin Cancer Res 16:1597–1604PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Capper D, Zentgraf H, Balss J et al (2009) Monoclonal antibody specific for IDH1 R132H mutation. Acta Neuropathol 118:599–601PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Capper D, Weissert S, Balss J et al (2010) Characterization of R132H mutation-specific IDH1 antibody binding in brain tumors. Brain Pathol 20:245–254PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Chou WC, Lei WC, Ko BS et al (2011) The prognostic impact and stability of Isocitrate dehydrogenase 2 mutation in adult patients with acute myeloid leukemia. Leukemia 25:246–253PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Horbinski C, Kelly L, Nikiforov YE et al (2010) Detection of IDH1 and IDH2 mutations by fluorescence melting curve analysis as a diagnostic tool for brain biopsies. J Mol Diagn 12:487–492PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Preusser M, Capper D, Hartmann C (2011) IDH testing in diagnostic neuropathology: review and practical guideline article invited by the Euro-CNS research committee. Clin Neuropathol 30:217–230PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ida CM, Lambert SR, Rodriguez FJ, et al.: (2012) BRAF Alterations are Frequent in Cerebellar Low-Grade Astrocytomas with Diffuse Growth Pattern. J Neuropathol Exp Neurol 71(7):631–639Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Boisselier B, Marie Y, Labussiere M et al (2010) COLD PCR HRM: a highly sensitive detection method for IDH1 mutations. Hum Mutat 31:1360–1365PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Preusser M, Wohrer A, Stary S et al (2011) Value and limitations of immunohistochemistry and gene sequencing for detection of the IDH1-R132H mutation in diffuse glioma biopsy specimens. J Neuropathol Exp Neurol 70:715–723PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Martin J. van den Bent
    • 1
  • C. Hartmann
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
  • Matthias Preusser
    • 5
  • Thomas Ströbel
    • 6
  • Hendrikus J. Dubbink
    • 7
  • Johan M. Kros
    • 7
  • Andreas von Deimling
    • 3
    • 4
  • Blandine Boisselier
    • 8
  • Marc Sanson
    • 8
  • Kevin C. Halling
    • 9
  • Kristin L. Diefes
    • 10
  • Kenneth Aldape
    • 10
  • Caterina Giannini
    • 9
  1. 1.Department of Neurology/Neuro-OncologyErasmus MC – Cancer InstituteRotterdamthe Netherlands
  2. 2.Department of NeuropathologyInstitute of Pathology, Hannover Medical SchoolHannoverGermany
  3. 3.Department of NeuropathologyInstitute of Pathology, Ruprecht-Karls-UniversitätHeidelbergGermany
  4. 4.Clinical Cooperation Unit NeuropathologyGerman Cancer Research CenterHeidelbergGermany
  5. 5.Department of Medicine I and Comprehensive Cancer Center CNS UniMedical University of ViennaViennaAustria
  6. 6.Institute of Neurology, Medical University of ViennaViennaAustria
  7. 7.Department of Pathology Erasmus MCRotterdamthe Netherlands
  8. 8.Centre de Recherche de l’Institut du Cerveau et de la Moelle épinière (CRICM) UMR-S975Université Pierre et Marie Curie-Paris 6ParisFrance
  9. 9.Department of Laboratory Medicine and PathologyMayo ClinicRochesterUSA
  10. 10.Department of PathologyMD Anderson Cancer CenterHoustonUSA

Personalised recommendations